Dear Florence: I am happy to report that I am a Cobbon descendant. John Cobban of Bankhead Clatt and his wife Janet Henderson are my 6th great grandparents. For several years I corresponded with the late Dr Cobbon who lived in Scotland and provided me with a wealth of information, including the fact that mice ate the first Churchbook for the parish of Keig which means that researching the early generations of the family is difficult. I can provide you with Cobban/Cobbon information in any form you like but suggest that I send you a GEDCOM file of the descendants of the first Cobban in my records and you send me a Gedcom file beginning with your earliest family member. There is no doubt that we are cousins. M Keith Abel Kingston, Ontario, Canada Florence Morrison wrote, October 12, 2009: > I am new to the list, mainly researching Cobbon/Cobban of Keig, Lumphanan, > Tough and Alford. > > Can someone please advise me if it is possible to obtain Monumental > Inscriptions and/or Burial records for the parishes of Keig, Lumphanan, > Tough and Alford. > > Are such available on CD or in booklet form? > > Or is there a kind person on this list who does lookups? > > Incidentally, I am happy to do Urquhart and Glenmoriston parish lookups. > > Kind regards > > Florence > Glen Urquhart, Inverness-shire

Hi Florence You can indeed get excellent MI booklets from the Aberdeen and North East Scotland FHS (_www.anesfhs.org.uk_ (http://www.anesfhs.org.uk) ) for Keig, Tough and Alford. I have several Cobbans buried in Keigh Old kirkyard - Francis 1808 - 1888; William 1812 - 1890 and Elizabeth 1802 - 1829. Any matches with yours? Regards Elizabeth Gabriel

If you manage a Rootsweb/Ancestry Message Board then check with the Board that is for Board Admins. If I recall correctly, that was some kind of a privacy/security issue. I don't think they expose any personal emails anymore and you have to go through their mail redirector to talk to anyone directly. I didn't think you could see them even if you were a subscriber, and you don't have to subscribe to reply to the board messages. That's why they took the emails off the old postings because those were not already in their database and thus couldn't get the redirection done. A bit of a mess, I agree But I think Fred's point, and my agreement with him, was about the zero cost for looking at the family tree and the complete control that you have over the data stored on their server. Regards - Glen C Bodie Web http://bodie.ca <http://bodie.ca/> Home mailto:glen@glenbodie.com Snail Mail: 76 Strathcona Ave, Toronto, ON, Canada M4J 1G8 _____ From: Brad and Jen [mailto:bradandjen@iinet.net.au] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:08 PM To: glen@glenbodie.com; aberdeen@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] recording a name Hi Fred, I joined rootsweb long before ancestory took over yet I have to subscribe to ancestory just to look at the email addresses on the message boards now, even my own! I've also noticed that ancestory has removed all email address from posts on the message boards before they took over. You say it is totally free of charges so maybe you can help me figure a way to contact others without paying this subscription fee? Thanks, Jen. > > -----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:46:13 -0500 > From: Fred H Held < <mailto:fhheld@netzero.net> fhheld@netzero.net> > Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] recording a name > To: <mailto:aberdeen@rootsweb.com> aberdeen@rootsweb.com, "ann zeman" < <mailto:annzeman@msn.com> annzeman@msn.com> > > I teach a seminar on "Managing your Family Records on the Internet". > In the seminar I encourage the use of RootsWeb WorldConnect. > <http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/> http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ Although it is supported by > Ancestry.com, it is totally free and free of any additional charges.

ANN DONALD born 1854, died 1933 in Aberdeen, mother Ann Duncan father John Donald. ANN DUNCAN was previously married to John Kemp, they had one known child ALEXANDER KEMP b. 1841 in Kinnithmout, ABDN. died Ontario 1908. Any info would be most welcome Don Wilson

1841 census shows a John Kemp, woolen hand weaver 40, Ann age 30, John 10, Ann 7, and Mary age 5 ... all at Brae Cults, Kinnethmont, ABD. It could be that Alexander was born after the 1841 census was taken. 1851 census shows the son John in Clatt Parish as a servant to a Wilson family. 1851 shows an Alexander Kemp, scholar age 9 living with Ann Duncan, unmarried age 39, Ann Robertson, mother, pauper, former servant age 62, at Overtown Cottage, Ellon ABD. This info from freecen@rootswed.com I would want to be doing some more digging. It is likely the girls married in the meanwhile. Goldie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don" <dwilson36@cogeco.ca> To: <aberdeen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 1:08 PM Subject: [ABERDEEN] MILNE, KEMP, DUNCAN, DONALD > ANN DONALD born 1854, died 1933 in Aberdeen, mother Ann Duncan father John > Donald. ANN DUNCAN was previously married to John Kemp, they had one known > child ALEXANDER KEMP b. 1841 in Kinnithmout, ABDN. died Ontario 1908. > Any info would be most welcome > > Don Wilson > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ABERDEEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I'd like to heartily agree with Fred. My experience with WorldConnect, starting back before Ancestry.com had heard of RootsWeb, has been nothing short of excellent. No one has yet suggested to me a service that seems to exceed it and I have made a large number of important new contacts with people who have found a connection between us through that posted family tree. Regards - Glen C Bodie Web http://bodie.ca Home mailto:glen@glenbodie.com Snail Mail: 76 Strathcona Ave, Toronto, ON, Canada M4J 1G8 -----Original Message----- Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:46:13 -0500 From: Fred H Held <fhheld@netzero.net> Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] recording a name To: aberdeen@rootsweb.com, "ann zeman" <annzeman@msn.com> Ann, I teach a seminar on "Managing your Family Records on the Internet". In the seminar I encourage the use of RootsWeb WorldConnect. http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ Although it is supported by Ancestry.com, it is totally free and free of any additional charges. I was terribly annoyed by Genes Reunited when I had to pay to see my own data, and insisted they remove my data. You have complete control of a RootsWeb WorldConnect submittal. You can specify the "cleansing" parameters, as well as many other display and download options. You can even specify if it is available for public view or not. If not for public view, it is still an excellent off-site backup of your data. (If you download a copy it is exactly as you uploaded it, not the "cleansed" version.) You can delete it if you want (something you cannot do on data burnt to CDs, such as Family Tree Maker's World Family Trees and LDS's Pedigree Resource Files.)

Thanks Ray Mike Hi Mike The FreeCEN records [ http://freecen.rootsweb.com/cgi/search.pl ] are somewhat patchy across Scotland becuase input depends on volunteers and transcription takes a long time.  I think you would do well to look on the Scotland's People site.  Its a payment site but doesn't cost a lot. [My credits have expired so I can only do numerical searches for you.] [ http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/index.aspx ] There are about 20 John HUMEs born between 1816 and 1826 on the 1841 and 1851 Census records for the whole of Scotland.  To view these hit lists would cost 40 UK pence [= 1 credit per census hit list] and might well enable you to identify your man.  Each full page image costs £1 UK [=5 credits] but there is a minimum inital payment of £6 which buys you 30 credits and 90 days access.  [See my hints & tips at -- http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP Mary PATTON is a bit more problematic...  For births between 1815 & 1821 there are 6 in 1841 and 3 in 1851.  However if you use Soundex [to cater for the more usual spelling PATON and other variants] the numbers shoot up to 48 and 62.  For Mary PATON precisely there are 46 and 39 hits in those censuses.  I think you need to look at the hit lists to see if there is a middle name recorded for Mary.

Thanks for that Louise, I've had a look at the archive as you suggested.  Being new to this List it is pure coincidence that I asked the 'Missing Mother' question now so soon after it had been discussed.   I can confirm from my own experience of OPRs that Clerks often pleased themselves about what was recorded.  I've been part of a team working on indexing the Dumfries Parish OPRs deaths and burial records. (Starts in 1617 and runs to 1854 -- published up to 1812 so far).   The SR records, however, being recorded in preprinted record books had specific slots to fill.  Provided the informant knew the detail the Registrar recorded it.  That said I would suggest that some of these early Registrars display an arrogance of officialdom that can't be said to have totally disappeared yet. In Benholm Parish, Kincardineshire, they have 'corrected' BLEWS to BLUES, McBEY to McBAY, McKAY to MACKIE to name just a few I have so far come across. I'm not surprised that so many early variations of my own name Aberdeenshire, PIT(T)(EN)DR(E)(I)(G)(C)H, have now disappeared.  Ah well it all adds to the 'fun'.   Regards, Sandy in Dumfries SW Scotland     --- On Tue, 6/10/09, medionemeton@blueyonder.co.uk <medionemeton@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: From: medionemeton@blueyonder.co.uk <medionemeton@blueyonder.co.uk> Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] FREEMAN & PITTENDREIGH FAMILY RESEARCH To: aberdeen@rootsweb.com Date: Tuesday, 6 October, 2009, 8:51 PM Hi Sandy, There has just been some interesting discussion on this very topic - it would be worth you looking at the archives for the last week or so. Women were often regarded as completely irrelevant by the clerk. But do remember also that it's not the birth that is being recorded (the birth was irrelevant to the church except in cases of illegitimacy), but the baptism. It may well be that it was only the father who took the child to be baptised if the mother was still in childbed, or it may simply be that he was seen as the only parent worth recording. As someone previously said, often a change of clerk means a complete change in the detail recorded - sometimes we are lucky, and sometimes not! Most of the OPRs that I have consulted are easy to read but rather short on the sort of details we would consider important - but then (unfortunately) they weren't writing with us in mind! Louise Sandy wrote: > never once does he recorded the name of the mother. > This practice of not recording mothers is also found in the Benholm OPR at > this time.  Maybe women were not considered that relevant when recording > births? ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ABERDEEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Sorry for the typo, that should have been Mary Ann PATTON b c 1828 (not 1868) Fossoway in the 1851 Census Also John Alexander HUME was a Minister so could have been anywhere in the 1841 and 1851 censuses in Scotland but thei marriage took place in Piitsligo in 1852 so I am assuming they were both in the county in 1851. Thanks Mike ________________________________ > Is anyone able to find the following for me please? > > Mary Ann PATTON, b c 1868 Fossoway in the 1851 census. > John Alexander HUME, b c 1811 in the 1841 and 1851 censuses.  Then the > whole family in 1861. > > They are likely to be somewhere in the county, possibly Tyrie (?). > _____________________________________________ Margaret Ann Patton, born 1868, is unlikely to be on the 1841 or 51 Census so I assume this is a typo.  There is one Margaret PATON in the 1841 at Quay, south Parish Aberdeen aged 10, so born around 1831.  No likely one shows up in 1851. If you are a member of ANESFHS, they have indexes for 1851 and 1861 which they would look up for you.

Hello.   Is anyone able to find the following for me please?   Mary Ann PATTON, b c 1868 Fossoway in the 1851 census. John Alexander HUME, b c 1811 in the 1841 and 1851 censuses. Then the whole family in 1861.   They are likely to be somewhere in the county, possibly Tyrie (?).   Thanks   Mike

2009/10/7 Michael Wells <casofilia@xtra.co.nz> wrote: > Sorry for the typo, that should have been Mary Ann PATTON b c 1828 (not 1868) Fossoway in the 1851 Census > Also John Alexander HUME was a Minister so could have been anywhere in the 1841 and 1851 censuses in Scotland but thei marriage took place in Piitsligo in 1852 so I am assuming they were both in the county in 1851. _____________________________________________ Hi Mike The FreeCEN records [ http://freecen.rootsweb.com/cgi/search.pl ] are somewhat patchy across Scotland becuase input depends on volunteers and transcription takes a long time. I think you would do well to look on the Scotland's People site. Its a payment site but doesn't cost a lot. [My credits have expired so I can only do numerical searches for you.] [ http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/index.aspx ] There are about 20 John HUMEs born between 1816 and 1826 on the 1841 and 1851 Census records for the whole of Scotland. To view these hit lists would cost 40 UK pence [= 1 credit per census hit list] and might well enable you to identify your man. Each full page image costs £1 UK [=5 credits] but there is a minimum inital payment of £6 which buys you 30 credits and 90 days access. [See my hints & tips at -- http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP Mary PATTON is a bit more problematic. For births between 1815 & 1821 there are 6 in 1841 and 3 in 1851. However if you use Soundex [to cater for the more usual spelling PATON and other variants] the numbers shoot up to 48 and 62. For Mary PATON precisely there are 46 and 39 hits in those censuses. I think you need to look at the hit lists to see if there is a middle name recorded for Mary. Two points to note. Firstly: ages are notoriously inaccurate in the Census hence I used a range of birth dates; also John's should [!] have been rounded down to the next lower multiple of 5. Secondly: by varying the search criteria you should try to get a multiple of 25 hits [or just under] as each page of 25 costs 20p [i.e. one credit] and the data might not be exactly as you expect. -- Best wishes Ray ********************************************************** >From Ray Hennessy Forenames website: www.whatsinaname.net Preferred Email address: ray@whatsinaname.net Hints for Scotland's People at http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP **********************************************************

2009/10/7 Michael Wells <casofilia@xtra.co.nz> wrote: > > Is anyone able to find the following for me please? > > Mary Ann PATTON, b c 1868 Fossoway in the 1851 census. > John Alexander HUME, b c 1811 in the 1841 and 1851 censuses. Then the > whole family in 1861. > > They are likely to be somewhere in the county, possibly Tyrie (?). > _____________________________________________ Michael FreeCEN has all Aberdeenshire on-line for 1841 and most [?all] for 1851 as well. Virtually none for 1861. There is only one John HUME, Linen Weaver at Little Belmont St, South Parish Aberdeen in 1841, living with George GEORGESON. He is shown as 35 which [only] implies a birth year of 1802-1806. For 1851 there isn't one with a reasonably close age in the whole of Aberdeenshire, including Tyrie. Margaret Ann Patton, born 1868, is unlikely to be on the 1841 or 51 Census so I assume this is a typo. There is one Margaret PATON in the 1841 at Quay, south Parish Aberdeen aged 10, so born around 1831. No likely one shows up in 1851. If you are a member of ANESFHS, they have indexes for 1851 and 1861 which they would look up for you. -- Best wishes Ray ********************************************************** >From Ray Hennessy Forenames website: www.whatsinaname.net Preferred Email address: ray@whatsinaname.net Hints for Scotland's People at http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP **********************************************************

Peter Higginbotham wrote: >A few months ago, I mentioned on this list that I was trying to identify the >locations of parish poorhouses/almshouses/lodging-houses/parish-homes (i.e. the >small locally run ones, not the bigger Combination Poorhouses). This is just to >say that I've now identified around 120 of these, of which about 40 were in >Aberdeenshire. There's a list on my web site at >http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Scotland/AlmshousesScotland.shtml >with links to more details (sometimes fairly minimal!) >Any further information on any of these establishments always very welcome. > > In addition to the "second tier" parochial Poors' Houses, I suspect that there may have been an even more informal layer. My gggm was "on the Poor" in the parish of Aberdour, Aberdeenshire, from 1857, when her husband reportedly deserted her to 1871, when she died. By a accident, the Inspector's petty disbursements for almost all of this time have been preserved, and from this and from Census data, it appears that the Parochial Board paid my ancestor's rent, but that, from time to time they quartered other paupers on her, paying her extra for doing their laundry and other tasks. There is no sign, in any of the OS maps that I have consulted (including the 25") of any building labelled as the Poor House, nor is there any mention, in the Parochial Board Minutes of any warden or other staff, but I suspect that the house she lived in for all of that time effectively was used to house paupers, and that she had some sort of informal role in supervising and caring for them. Gavin Bell

A few months ago, I mentioned on this list that I was trying to identify the locations of parish poorhouses/almshouses/lodging-houses/parish-homes (i.e. the small locally run ones, not the bigger Combination Poorhouses). This is just to say that I've now identified around 120 of these, of which about 40 were in Aberdeenshire. There's a list on my web site at http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Scotland/AlmshousesScotland.shtml with links to more details (sometimes fairly minimal!) Any further information on any of these establishments always very welcome. Regards, Peter Higginbotham www.workhouses.org.uk

Hi Ray, I too use FTM 2005 so if you click on 'edit' box (below the individual's information) and go into general you will see the AKA box next to Title. Regards, Jen. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Hennessy" <ray7033@googlemail.com> To: <aberdeen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:19 AM Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] recording an alternate name > Nope! I guess it wasn't a feature of FTM 2005 unless I am on the wrong > screen. > > I enter names on the Family View screen, either as child or parent. I > have > put in one or two unrelated individuals but the screen for these doesn't > have a "More" box either. The only box to the right of the name on my > version is an icon for a Source/Citation. Oh well, if this becomes a > problem I'll probably have to get an upgrade. [And probably have to learn > all sorts of unwanted "improvements", too!] > > -- > Best wishes > > Ray

2009/10/7 Jen <bradandjen@iinet.net.au> wrote: I too use FTM 2005 so if you click on 'edit' box (below the individual's > information) and go into general you will see the AKA box next to Title. Thanks Jen. After a coupla false starts I actually managed to find it! I think I must be over-tired!! Now, of course, it is blindingly obvious! Unfortuately this doesn't cater for the original query about being able to access the record by this name. I think I will continue entering the name as e.g. "Jean or Jane SMITH" or "John GRAY or GREY" which is a lot clearer both on the Family View and in the Index of Individuals. So far I only have three or four like this. -- Best wishes Ray ********************************************************** >From Ray Hennessy Forenames website: www.whatsinaname.net Preferred Email address: ray@whatsinaname.net Hints for Scotland's People at http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP **********************************************************

2009/10/6 Barbara I. Amburgey <b.amburgey@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > Ray, > > The "more" box is just to the right of where you enter the person's name. Hi Barb Nope! I guess it wasn't a feature of FTM 2005 unless I am on the wrong screen. I enter names on the Family View screen, either as child or parent. I have put in one or two unrelated individuals but the screen for these doesn't have a "More" box either. The only box to the right of the name on my version is an icon for a Source/Citation. Oh well, if this becomes a problem I'll probably have to get an upgrade. [And probably have to learn all sorts of unwanted "improvements", too!] -- Best wishes Ray ********************************************************** >From Ray Hennessy Forenames website: www.whatsinaname.net Preferred Email address: ray@whatsinaname.net Hints for Scotland's People at http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP **********************************************************

Hi folks, I think it depends on what version of FTM you are using. I have just re-installed all my software on a new computer and upgraded some of it as well. I was using FTM v16 and now have FTM 2009 which includes some Ancestry stuff and it is a VERY different beast! And may not have improved IMHO! Pat -----Original Message----- From: aberdeen-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:aberdeen-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barbara I. Amburgey Sent: 06 October 2009 23:29 To: aberdeen@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ABERDEEN] recording an alternate name Ray, The "more" box is just to the right of where you enter the person's name. >> > > Hi Barb > > Well, I'd love to use this but I can't find a "More" box. Could you > re-identify it for me [very tired brain cell!] <[snip]>

2009/10/6 Barbara I. Amburgey <b.amburgey@worldnet.att.net> wrote: To record all the names found for any individual click on the "more" square > and when the new page comes up--off to the right is a line of boxes, click > on the "Lineage" box and use the AKA line to record all the other known > names or spellings. > Hi Barb Well, I'd love to use this but I can't find a "More" box. Could you re-identify it for me [very tired brain cell!] _____________________________________________ This was in reply to: 2009/10/6 Thomas Waskett <Thomaswaskett@aol.com> wrote: > For example Jane is sometimes recorded as Jean > Windham Dean as an adult was known as Wyndham Warren. Hi Thomas If Barb's point doesn't apply for your package, you can probably enter "Jean or Jane" and "Windham DEAN or Wynham WARREN" in the relevant boxes. In the latter case you would have to be careful to get any children's names right! Note that Jean and Jane are interchangeable in virtually all Scottish records but the principle applies. -- Best wishes Ray ********************************************************** >From Ray Hennessy Forenames website: www.whatsinaname.net Preferred Email address: ray@whatsinaname.net Hints for Scotland's People at http://bit.ly/WIAN-SCP **********************************************************

Fred: I am sure others are going to reply similarly that our newspapers print reports of births marriages and deaths every day and it may be possible to find them in back issues of newspapers. It is the ability to randomly search for peoples names and expect to find a record that is subject to the 100 yr rule. Janet ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred H Held" <fhheld@netzero.net> > Gavin, > > "Cleansing" is the term used to remove from view those people in your > online family tree that might still be alive. This would cover the > European 100-year secrecy laws, as well as the American 72-year > courtesy rule. In RW WorldConnect you can choose to not show a person > that might be alive (no death date entered) or show only the surname > with the given name as "Private" with no dates or additional information. > > In the USA we have no 100-year secrecy law, in fact it would be > difficult to have one. It is common practice to have births and > marriages, as well as deaths, announced in the newspapers, which puts > that information into public domain. It is only a courtesy that we do > not show living people. > > Fred